So, Michael Brown was the SMART one?

[dukeuch]

Article put out by AP speaks of video conferences where, in the days leading up to Katrina, hurricane experts and various federal officials, including Brown, voiced grave concerns about the likley impact of Katrina and the lack of preparedness, to Bush and Chertoff. Bush's response the to LA state officials was "We are fully prepared" (which apprently conflicts with the concerns Brown was voicing). Apparently, the warnings included extensive discussions about the possibility that the levees would breach.

So, among the administration's myriad of failings regarding Katrina, when Bush said four days after the storm that "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees", was he lying, forgetful, or just plain too stupid to understand what he was told before the storm?

[Spence]

Yeah, the video obtained by the Associated Press shows Bush being told that the levees could be breached. A few days later, he tells the media that nobody anticipated that the levees could be breached. This reminds me of when Condi Rice told the media that and Congress that nobody could have anticipated that terrorists would fly airplanes into buildings and then we find out that just such a scenario was presented to the government before 9/11/01.

What is it with these people? Truth is to the Bush administration what garlic is to a vampire.

[Spence]

In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, risk lives in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage of the briefings.

Bush didn't ask a single question during the final government-wide briefing the day before Katrina struck on Aug. 29 but assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: "We are fully prepared."

Six days of footage and transcripts obtained by The Associated Press show in excruciating detail that while federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, they were fatally slow to realize they had not mustered enough resources to deal with the unprecedented disaster.

Linked by secure video, Bush's bravado on Aug. 29 starkly contrasts with the dire warnings his disaster chief and a cacophony of federal, state and local officials provided during the four days before the storm.

A top hurricane expert voiced "grave concerns" about the levees and then-Federal Emergency Management Agency chief Michael Brown told the president and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that he feared there weren't enough disaster teams to help evacuees at the Superdome.

"I'm concerned about ... their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe," Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.
...
Bush declared four days after the storm, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans. But the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility and Bush was worried too.Source (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/print?id=1675984)

[Agrawog]

For now I am going to go with the overall theory of chaos before and during the first day of the storm as well as afterwards.

However, if this evidence is just the start of material showing that Bush and top officials received warnings and did nothing and THEN lied about receiving the warnings to save face? well always remember the main axion - the cover up is worse than the act.

In this case both may be terrible. I just wish we had another election to show this guy how we really feel about him now. How does everyone feel about voting for Bush now? Is two men kissing really a terrible thing?

[Ibleedburgundy]

He didn't ask a single quetion yet assured everyone they were fully prepared. Just like how he didn't even know about the port deal then he came out in a press conference and said "if there was any doubt in my mind that this was a security risk..."

They're getting sloppy. Hard to keep up with all the lies I'm sure. I'm just waiting for there to be a press conference and Karl Rove is going to run out from the bathroom with his pants around his ankles yelling "Say vandalay Industries! Say Vandalay Industries!"

[RedskinsDave]

I love how the tune has changed on Brown. How predictable.

[Spence]

I love how the tune has changed on Brown. How predictable.I don't think the tune has changed, Dave. I'm assuming [always dangerous, I know] that the title of the thread is meant rather ironically. Anyway, Brown doesn't really have anything to do with this. He was a hack before and he's a hack now. That reflects badly on him, but also on the man who gave him a job he never should have been given.

Fortunately, we don't have to take Mr Brown's word for anything. [A good thing since it might be worth nothing.] Here we have videotape of Mr Bush and others being specifically warned that the levees in New Orleans could be breached. Days later, after the worst has happened, Mr Bush told the media that no one could have anticipated that the levees would have been breached. Not only is that false, Mr Bush knew it was false at the time. [Either that or he's too scatterbrained to be President of the Three Stooges Fan Club, much less President of the United States.]

This isn't about Mike "Heckuvajob" Brown. Mr Brown will be remembered by history, to the extent he is remembered at all, as a mediocrity who, liked Nero, fiddled while the city burned -- or drowned, in this case. This is about Mr Bush, who has demonstrated yet again that when confronted by uncomfortable facts, his first and last instinct is always to prevaricate. By now that must be apparent to everyone. I can understand why people like Neil Cavuto continue to defend Mr Bush. That's his job and what he's paid to do. But unless you're actually on the payroll, how can anyone defend this? It is literally indefensible.

[OCSkinzFan]

I don't think the tune has changed, Dave. I'm assuming [always dangerous, I know] that the title of the thread is meant rather ironically. Anyway, Brown doesn't really have anything to do with this. He was a hack before and he's a hack now. That reflects badly on him, but also on the man who gave him a job he never should have been given.

Fortunately, we don't have to take Mr Brown's word for anything. [A good thing since it might be worth nothing.] Here we have videotape of Mr Bush and others being specifically warned that the levees in New Orleans could be breached. Days later, after the worst has happened, Mr Bush told the media that no one could have anticipated that the levees would have been breached. Not only is that false, Mr Bush knew it was false at the time. [Either that or he's too scatterbrained to be President of the Three Stooges Fan Club, much less President of the United States.]

This isn't about Mike "Heckuvajob" Brown. Mr Brown will be remembered by history, to the extent he is remembered at all, as a mediocrity who, liked Nero, fiddled while the city burned -- or drowned, in this case. This is about Mr Bush, who has demonstrated yet again that when confronted by uncomfortable facts, his first and last instinct is always to prevaricate. By now that must be apparent to everyone. I can understand why people like Neil Cavuto continue to defend Mr Bush. That's his job and what he's paid to do. But unless you're actually on the payroll, how can anyone defend this? It is literally indefensible.
Entry Word: prevaricate
Function: verb
Text: to make a statement one knows to be untrue <during the hearings the witness was willing to prevaricate in order to protect his friend> -- see LIE 1

[dukeuch]

I love how the tune has changed on Brown. How predictable.

I still think that Brown was innefective and woefully unqualified for the job. Taking that into account, what does that say about the guys who ignored or fooled themselves about what legitimate concerns the guy DID bring up?

I just think it is interesting that the guy who was thrown under the bus protests that, hey, I did warn them, and then proof that he did shows up. If he deserved to be fired, why not Chertoff too? Why shouldn't Bush be held responsible at leaset for lying to the public?